Right now, the remains of three private spacecraft rest on the moon, with one more lost in Earth orbit. And that is incredible.
First came Israel’s Beresheet, which crashed on the lunar surface in 2019. Next was Astrobotic’s Peregrine, which suffered an anomaly and was ordered to burn up in Earth’s atmosphere in early 2024. Then, Intuitive Machines’ Odysseus became the first functioning private vehicle to land on the moon — though it landed harder than expected and didn’t live as long as planned. The company tried again with Athena earlier this month, which touched down on its side but still completed key mission objectives before running out of power. Finally, Firefly Aerospace’s Blue Ghost crossed the finish line with a fully successful landing — alive, transmitting and delivering incredible images and other results.
And this is just the beginning. Soon, the U.S.-Japanese iSpace team will attempt its own touchdown, marking yet another milestone in what is quickly evolving into a true private-sector space race.
Without historical context, it may seem like these companies aren’t doing so well. But take a step back: at the dawn of the original space race, the Soviet Union and the United States failed 20 times — including at least three missions that missed the moon entirely.
Sure, as every one of these companies will tell you, they’re building on the work of giants and benefiting from a platform of knowledge and technology their predecessors didn’t have. But nonetheless, this is history unfolding. These first small steps are paving the way for the real giant leap — humanity’s permanent expansion into the solar system.
The real bottleneck isn’t technology — it’s policy
It’s easy to criticize from the sidelines and offer armchair advice to the companies in the arena. But what matters is: they’re making it happen.
I’ve been working toward a human return to the moon since 1988 — through policy, advocacy, investment and launching space startups via SpaceFund. And after decades of stagnation, we’re finally seeing forward momentum. But now that we’ve reached this point, the biggest risk isn’t technical — it’s political and psychological.
Some argue our focus should be on Mars. I get it — I’ve even called for it in another SpaceNews op-ed. I know the guy leading that push is kind of smart — but dropping the moon for Mars is small thinking. We can do better. We can do both, simultaneously developing low Earth orbit (LEO), the moon and beyond. We don’t have to choose.
Government must get out of its own way
For decades, U.S. and international space efforts have been choked by a single-pipeline mentality: one central program at a time, dictated and distorted by political cycles, implemented through a bureaucracy that moves at a glacial pace.
This isn’t just inefficient — it’s undemocratic. It explains why the U.S. human space program has moved at tectonic speeds since Apollo. If NASA is the sole entity managing space for the American people, and political realities demand one flagship program at a time, then of course progress is slow. It’s important to get this if you want to understand why we’re now in a so-called race with China to put the next humans on the moon. Had the American space program taken a better approach, there would be no race. We’d be inviting the new arrivals to tea instead.
The American model is not how frontiers work. Yet that is exactly the framing within which U.S. conversations about space have occurred for over 50 years. It’s absurd. Imagine if, after scouting west of the Mississippi, the government had followed Lewis and Clark with the construction of one government “Frontier Station” served by one government “River Shuttle.” Imagine if, after inventing the airplane, we had established one government-run airline with flights approved by Congress — one route at a time.
This was the fundamental failure of Apollo. The U.S., facing off against the Soviet Union’s state-controlled space program, responded with a state-controlled space program of its own. We out-mobilized the Russians — but we couldn’t hold the ground we gained. Why? Because state-run programs in democracies only last as long as the political will to sustain them. When voter passion fades, so does the funding.
That’s why today’s moon race matters. It’s still dominated by governments, but after decades of work by activists, there’s been an achingly slow shift in LEO to expand the number of players. That shift must now continue — and it must be the new starting point for our return to the moon. A robust and fully supported handoff of leadership to the private sector is the key to ensuring we don’t just return to the moon — but that we stay.
CLPS: A model for what’s next
Those small robots on the moon attest that NASA got something right with its Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program. CLPS injected badly needed funds and tech support into innovative lunar projects — almost as a sideshow to the bloated, bureaucratic Artemis 1.0 “Return to the moon” program.
Yet now, in stark contrast to the cost overruns and delays plaguing Artemis, CLPS is demonstrating something extraordinary: even so-called “failures” in this model cost pennies on the dollar compared to traditional government-run robotic missions. And rather than driving toward the same lunar dead-end as Artemis 1.0, each success in this new partnership helps open a wider path for U.S. economic development on the moon.
Now is the moment not just to build on this progress — but to multiply it.
Artemis 2.0 – pioneering the moon
NASA’s role regarding the moon must be reimagined. As we are starting to see in LEO, Congress must shift funding and priorities so that the centerpiece of U.S. lunar policy becomes enabling private efforts. These pioneering initiatives cannot remain sideshows to the Artemis-Apollo rerun. It’s time to move American enterprise to center stage and let people lead.
It’s time to move beyond the Apollo-style state model and embrace what I call Artemis 2.0 — a strategically planned government and private sector initiative to establish a robust lunar industrial base and transportation system within 10 years.
Artemis 2.0, rather than originating from NASA’s central-planning command structure, would be a moon program designed around entrepreneurs, innovators and free-market forces. A program using an all-of-government system of incentives and support — from tech development to anchor tenancy, data purchase and tax breaks — to catalyze the “Moon Boom” that should have happened after Apollo.
Meanwhile, NASA can turn its central focus to putting the first people on Mars. Even if the first mission is a relative sprint, we’ll be learning skills on the moon we’ll need to go further.
The moment to act is now
The spacecraft lost along the way are not failures. They are signposts. They prove this is possible. That we are making it possible.
I call on Congress, the White House, and the governments of all free nations to support the end of Artemis 1.0 and its replacement by a truly American enterprise-based Artemis 2.0 — fully and without delay.
Regarding the race with China, we change our answer:
- If they want to plant a flag and send back a selfie from the moon, fine. Been there, done that. We’ll be on our way to Mars.
- If they want to “claim” the best locations on the moon and develop lunar resources, fine. We — American companies and institutions — will be racing them to the best spots.
- If they want to build a state-run “industrial park,” fine. We’ll be founding the first real moon village — for free people and enterprises.
The giant leap Neil Armstrong spoke of in 1969 never happened. Not because we lacked the ability — but because we lacked an American-style plan to make it happen. NASA did its job, and did it perfectly. But it’s been given the wrong job now.
We can change that, right now.
We can walk, chew gum and open the solar system all at the same time.
We just need to be true to our own principles — unleash the power of the people — and we will not only make a giant leap. We will soar!
Rick Tumlinson Founded the EarthLight Foundation and SpaceFund, a venture capital firm. He Co-Founded The Space Frontier Foundation, was a founding board member of the XPrize, and hosts “The Space Revolution” on iRoc Space Radio, part of the iHeart Radio Network. His new book “Why Space? The Purpose of People” arrives in June.
SpaceNews is committed to publishing our community’s diverse perspectives. Whether you’re an academic, executive, engineer or even just a concerned citizen of the cosmos, send your arguments and viewpoints to opinion@spacenews.com to be considered for publication online or in our next magazine.The perspectives shared in these op-eds are solely those of the authors.
